Crypto Terrorists to be Tried in Military Tribunal

[Declan McCullagh]

I think it's unclear, perhaps even intentionally ambiguous.

One way of reading the executive order (that section of it, at least)
is that it preserves the ability of the DoD to try members of the
military in a different form of tribunal that might have more
procedural safeguards, and that it preserves the authority of civilian
courts. That is the more, um, benign interpretation.

The other interpretation is that Bush does not want to limit the power
of the military to try civilian U.S. citizens in some cases, subject
to "lawful authority."

The thing is, though, that if Bush intends to try the second approach,
focusing on that paragraph is maybe misguided: If he's daring enough
to do it without explicit Congressional sanction, then he can just
sign another exeucitve order. Only take him a few minutes to write one
and scribble his signature.

-Declan


http://www.politechbot.com/p-02797.html

On Sun, Nov 18, 2001 at 11:14:25PM -0500, Peter Capelli wrote:
> Okay, here's a question from a 'stupid fuck'; Did *you* read the order?
> Check out Section 7 (a) (3):
> 
> Sec. 7.  Relationship to Other Law and Forums.
> 
> (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to --
> 
> (1)  authorize the disclosure of state secrets to any person not otherwise
> authorized to have access to them;
> (2)  limit the authority of the President as Commander in Chief of the Armed
> Forces or the power of the President to grant reprieves and pardons; or
> 
> (3)  limit the lawful authority of the Secretary of Defense, any military
> commander, or any other officer or agent of the United States or of any
> State to detain or try any person who is not an individual subject to this
> order.
> 
> 
> Now I am not a lawyer, but doesn't that mean that this can be applied to
> anyone?
> 
> -p
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Anonymous" <nobody at noisebox.remailer.org>
> To: <cypherpunks at lne.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 3:24 PM
> Subject: Re: Crypto Terrorists to be Tried in Military Tribunal
> 
> 
> > Jei writes:
> >
> > > I thought this would be relevant to the list members.
> > >
> > > http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/11/20011113-27.html
> > >
> > > http://cryptome.org/pmo111301.htm
> > >
> > > http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/11/13/193921.shtml
> > >
> > > And what is a Crypto Terrorist, you ask? Of course,
> > > it is someone who hides things with cryptography,
> > > e.g. a potential Cyber Terrorist. ;-P
> > >
> > > At 9:07 PM -0500 11/14/01, Andrew C. Greenberg wrote:
> > > >I saw the part in article III about one supreme court and subsidiary
> > > >courts.  Sorry, where, exactly, does it say that military tribunals
> have
> > > >jurisdiction over civilians?
> >
> > Read the fucking order at cryptome:
> >
> >    Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War
> >    Against Terrorism
> >
> > See that?  "Non-Citizens", you stupid fucks!  What a barrel of retards
> > we've got around here.
> >
> >
> 
> **************************************************************************************************
> The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential.
> It is intended for the named recipient(s) only.
> If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager or  the 
> sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any one or make copies.
> 
> ** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals and malicious content **
> **************************************************************************************************